All That Glitter is not Gold: Computed Tomography-Kidney Ureter Bladder (CT-KUB) is not necessary for a Safe Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

{"title":"All That Glitter is not Gold: Computed Tomography-Kidney Ureter Bladder (CT-KUB) is not necessary for a Safe Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy","authors":"","doi":"10.36283/pjmd11-2/007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Diagnosis of renal stones is tricky and appropriate diagnosis requires exact location and size identification of renal stones along with the degree of obstruction and hydronephrosis. This study aimed to compare the difference between Ultrasound and Computed tomography Kidney ureter Bladder (CT KUB) groups for stone clearance, diagnostic accuracy, laboratory parameters, and complications.\n\nMethods: This is a cross-sectional, comparative effectiveness trial; patients (n=100) with suspected renal stones were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio in two different imaging groups, Group A (n=50) participants had ultrasonography and group B (n=50) patients had Computed tomography as a diagnostic imaging modality. The complications and operative differences were compared with the help of student t-test and chi-square tests, a p-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.\n\nResults: The mean age of the patients was 37.3 ± 17 years and 45.8 ± 14.7 years in group A and group B, respectively. The study found no difference (0.3 and 0.1) between pre-operative stone size measurements of the renal unit by ultrasound and CT [(2.4±0.9 cm and 2.7±1.8cm (right) 1.8±1.0 cm and 1.9±0.7 cm (left)]. The sensitivity and specificity of USG for renal stone diagnosis was 84.8%, while CT indicated 86% accuracy, X-Ray KUB was used for radiopaque stones only and showed 78.6% sensitivity and specificity.\n\nConclusion: The pre-operative stone sizes indicated in ultrasonography and CT were similar in intra-operative, retrograde pyelogram (RPG) measurements, referred to the accuracy of stone size prediction. Simple x-ray and ultrasonography are cost-effective, easily available in hospitals, with minimal radiation exposure.\n\nKeywords: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy; Ultrasonography; Kidney Stones.","PeriodicalId":231166,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Medicine and Dentistry","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Medicine and Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36283/pjmd11-2/007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Diagnosis of renal stones is tricky and appropriate diagnosis requires exact location and size identification of renal stones along with the degree of obstruction and hydronephrosis. This study aimed to compare the difference between Ultrasound and Computed tomography Kidney ureter Bladder (CT KUB) groups for stone clearance, diagnostic accuracy, laboratory parameters, and complications. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, comparative effectiveness trial; patients (n=100) with suspected renal stones were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio in two different imaging groups, Group A (n=50) participants had ultrasonography and group B (n=50) patients had Computed tomography as a diagnostic imaging modality. The complications and operative differences were compared with the help of student t-test and chi-square tests, a p-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean age of the patients was 37.3 ± 17 years and 45.8 ± 14.7 years in group A and group B, respectively. The study found no difference (0.3 and 0.1) between pre-operative stone size measurements of the renal unit by ultrasound and CT [(2.4±0.9 cm and 2.7±1.8cm (right) 1.8±1.0 cm and 1.9±0.7 cm (left)]. The sensitivity and specificity of USG for renal stone diagnosis was 84.8%, while CT indicated 86% accuracy, X-Ray KUB was used for radiopaque stones only and showed 78.6% sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: The pre-operative stone sizes indicated in ultrasonography and CT were similar in intra-operative, retrograde pyelogram (RPG) measurements, referred to the accuracy of stone size prediction. Simple x-ray and ultrasonography are cost-effective, easily available in hospitals, with minimal radiation exposure. Keywords: Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy; Ultrasonography; Kidney Stones.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
所有闪光的都不是金子:计算机断层扫描-肾输尿管膀胱(CT-KUB)对于安全的经皮肾镜取石术是不必要的
背景:肾结石的诊断是棘手的,适当的诊断需要准确的肾结石的位置和大小,以及梗阻和肾积水的程度。本研究旨在比较超声和计算机断层扫描肾输尿管膀胱(CT KUB)组在结石清除、诊断准确性、实验室参数和并发症方面的差异。方法:这是一项横断面、比较疗效的试验;疑似肾结石的患者(n=100)按1:1的比例随机分为两组,a组(n=50)进行超声检查,B组(n=50)进行计算机断层扫描作为诊断成像方式。采用学生t检验和卡方检验比较并发症和手术差异,p值为0.05认为有统计学意义。结果:A组和B组患者平均年龄分别为37.3±17岁和45.8±14.7岁。本研究发现术前超声和CT测量肾单元结石大小无差异(0.3和0.1)[(2.4±0.9 cm和2.7±1.8cm(右)1.8±1.0 cm和1.9±0.7 cm(左)]。USG诊断肾结石的敏感性和特异性为84.8%,CT诊断准确率为86%,X-Ray KUB仅用于不透光的肾结石,敏感性和特异性为78.6%。结论:术中逆行肾盂造影(RPG)显示的术前结石大小与CT显示的相似,均与预测结石大小的准确性有关。简单的x射线和超声检查成本效益高,在医院很容易获得,辐射暴露最小。关键词:经皮肾镜取石术;超声;肾结石。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Use of Hair Straightening Chemicals and Uterine Cancer Role of Injection Lidocaine with and without Triamcinolone Acetonide in the Management of Chronic Pain in Post-Operative Inguinal Hernioplasty No Action Today, No Cure Tomorrow - A Review of Agricultural Factors Predisposing Humans at The Risk of Antimicrobial Resistance and Its Preventive Strategies Body Locations of Leishmaniasis in the Targeted Population of Pakistan Laser Dentistry: Illuminating the Future of Dental Care
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1